Evidence summaries tailored to health policy-makers in low- and middle-income countries
Sarah E Rosenbaum, Claire Glenton, Charles Shey Wiysonge, Edgardo Abalos, Luciano Mignini, Taryn Young, Fernando Althabe, Agustín Ciapponi, Sebastian Garcia Marti, Qingyue Meng, Jian Wang, Ana Maria De la Hoz Bradford, Suzanne N Kiwanuka, Elizeus Rutebemberwa, George W Pariyo, Signe Flottorp & Andrew D Oxman
Volume 89, Number 1, January 2011, 54-61
Table 1. Information needs of policy-makers with respect to the evidence
| General topic | What is already known |
|---|---|
| Retrieval | Timely retrieval of relevant research facilitates use. |
| Time scale for commissioning new research fits poorly into time frame for policy-making. |
|
| Research is often published in academic sources poorly accessible to policy-makers. |
|
| Relevance for LMICs | LMIC policy-makers may have limited access to subscription-based information or to the Internet. |
| Research carried out in high-income countries may have limited applicability to LMICs. |
|
| Content | Systematic reviews sometimes answer too narrow a question. |
| Policy-makers want not just information about “what works”, but also clearly articulated implications for policy, such as costs, applicability, impacts on equity. |
|
| Design/ease of use | Length is a barrier; short summaries (with key messages highlighted) are strongly preferred. |
| The perceptions that reviews facilitate the critical appraisal of evidence and are easy to use are strongly associated with use. |
|
| Correct understanding of evidence and its quality in full-text format may be difficult for non-researchers. Tables that summarize findings may help. |
|
| Use of familiar, jargon-free “plain language” is recommended. |
LMCIs, low- and middle-income countries.